|
Poster:
|
 brewster |
Date:
|
June 25, 2003 05:56:18am |
|
Forum:
|
etree
|
Subject:
|
Re: We are switching from tar to zip |
I dont know why the speed would be any different. the file sizes should be the same (maybe slightly different).
Please bring up an inconvenience or speed issues that come up... we really want to make this work well.
-brewster
|
Poster:
|
Diana Hamilton |
Date:
|
June 25, 2003 11:45:16am |
|
Forum:
|
etree
|
Subject:
|
Re: We are switching from tar to zip- speed report |
Last week I was testing a low-demand item with freecache
http://www.archive.org/audio/etree-details-db.php?id=4627
(which as I reported in a previous freecache thread, I apparently snuck into a cache by accident).
Speeds last week on the .tar version were ~17 K/s before caching, ~200 K/s in first try from cache, ~100 K/s in a couple later tries.
I went to the same item using the same commercial cable connection a couple hr ago and d/l the zip. Speed was an even 30-32 K/s the whole way though.
The freecache status page shows it's in freecache01.archive.org, so I guess I pulled it from there.
Given all the variables lately with the site, any difference between now and last week is not too surprising to me.
This post was modified by hamilton on 2003-06-25 18:45:16
|
Poster:
|
Jonathan Aizen |
Date:
|
June 25, 2003 11:51:17am |
|
Forum:
|
etree
|
Subject:
|
Re: We are switching from tar to zip- speed report |
I think items in freecache01.archive.org are not going to be particularly fast because the share the same bandwidth as the rest of our machines. My understanding is that machine is used for testing in development and will eventually disappear.
What we need now are more nodes on high speed connections (i.e. universities). If anyone knows people in CS or IT departments are their university, we would love to communicate with them about participating in the FreeCache project.
TVNews
OpenLibrary